 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Chace v. Dorcy Internatl.3/4/1991
Ohio App. 441, 59 O.O. 194, 134 N.E.2d 88.
R.C. 2721.02 provides as follows:
"Courts of record may declare rights, status, and other legal relations whether or not further relief is or could be claimed. No action or proceeding is open to objection on the ground that a declaratory judgment or decree is prayed for. The declaration may be either affirmative or negative in form and effect. Such declaration has the effect of a final judgment or decree." (Emphasis added.)
Furthermore, R.C. 2721.03 and 2721.04 provide questions regarding contract construction and obligations thereunder may be brought in a declaratory judgment action so a party may "obtain a declaration of rights, status, or other legal relations thereunder." R.C. 2721.03.
Importantly, the legislature granted ancillary power to the courts hearing declaratory judgment actions providing in R.C. 2721.09 as follows:
"Whenever necessary or proper, further relief based on a declaratory judgment or decree previously granted may be given. The application therefor shall be by petition to a court having jurisdiction to grant the relief. If the application is sufficient, the court shall, on reasonable notice, require any adverse party, whose rights have been adjudicated by the declaratory judgment or decree, to show cause why further relief should not be granted forthwith." (Emphasis added.)
Kansa was given the opportunity to appear at trial court hearings, before final judgment was rendered, without waiving its defense of lack of personal jurisdiction and argue each point of law it deemed appropriate.
This court has held in Jeppe v. Blue Cross (1980), 67 Ohio App.2d 87, 21 O.O.3d 406, 425 N.E.2d 947, that while there exists no express statutory provision for granting a money judgment in a declaratory judgment action, such relief may nonetheless be granted so long as two conditions are met: (1) the prayer for relief must contain either an express request for money judgment or one which could be construed as such; and (2) any judgment rendered must before execution be for a specific amount of money and specify the amount to be recovered. American Life & Accident Ins. Co. v. Jones (1949), 152 Ohio St. 287, 40 O.O. 326, 89 N.E.2d 301; Roach v. Roach (1956), 164 Ohio St. 587, 59 O.O. 1, 132 N.E.2d 742 (other citations listed in Jeppe omitted). In American Life, supra, the Supreme Court endorsed the payment of a money judgment in a declaratory judgment action albeit based upon the G.C. 12102-8 which provided in part:
"Further relief based on a declaratory judgment or decree may be granted whenever necessary or proper. The application there for shall be by petition to a court having jurisdiction to grant the relief."
Clearly the language and legislative intent of G.C. 12102-8 was perpetuated with the passage of R.C. 2721.09 which contains similar language.
Furthermore, where an insurer resorts to delaying tactics, fails to defend and takes a litigious course of conduct which the insured hardly bargained for, the trial court has the discretion to allow expense; costs and attorney fees. Motorists Mut. Ins. Co. v. Trainor (1973), 33 Ohio St.2d 41, 62 O.O.2d 402, 294 N.E.2d 874.
Plaintiffs' prayer for relief in their complaint against Kansa requested a determination that Kansa was liable to indemnify them to the $1,000,000 policy limits, which clearly was and could be construed as an express request for judgment in that amount. See Jeppe, supra. Plaintiffs' prayer included the desire of exercising judicial economy and avoiding a multiplicity of lawsuits. In addition, plaintiffs made an express request for their attornesfees an
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Ohio Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|